BACEI RES Report

A Roadmap For
Economic Resilience
The Bay Area Regional Economic Strategy

A ROADMAP FOR ECONOMIC RESILIENCE: the bay area regional economic strategy
In 2012, the Bay Area Council Economic Institute published a Regional Economic Assessment, supported by the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission (MTC) and the business community, which contained a series of recommendations on economic policy
and governance, including the need for the development of a regional economic strategy. It also recommended a deeper conversation
between business and government earlier in the regional planning process, such that critical economic objectives are embedded in
future regional strategies. Thanks to generous funding from the MTC and in-kind support from the Bay Area Council, the Bay Area
Council Economic Institute carried out over a 12-month period the Bay Area Regional Economic Strategy process that has culminated in
this roadmap document.
This engagement process brought together the region’s business leaders and other stakeholders to identify the top opportunities for
securing the region’s global competitiveness, broad-based opportunity, and economic vitality.
Given the various regional planning and strategy efforts currently underway, including the update to Plan Bay Area, this project
provides perspective from the business community on multiple issue areas. There is an important opportunity to align the findings of
this project with the conclusions of work by other efforts on economic policy and governance in the region and the state, for example
with the work of the California Economic Summit and the Regional Prosperity Strategy.
project steering committee
Dr. Laura Tyson, Professor of Business Administration and Economics, UC Berkeley
Dr. John Williams, President & CEO, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco
Michael Covarrubias, Chairman & CEO, TMG Partners
Dr. Jeffrey Welser, Vice President and Lab Director, IBM Research – Almaden IBM Corporation
Teresa Briggs, Managing Partner, Deloitte
Lenny Mendonca, Director Emeritus, McKinsey & Company/Craft Brewer, Half Moon Bay Brewery
Ezra Rapport, Executive Director, Association of Bay Area Governments
Steve Heminger, Executive Director, Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Jim Wunderman, President & CEO, Bay Area Council
There were many substantive contributors to this project. Tracey Grose (BACEI Vice President) designed and directed the project. Jeff
Bellisario (BACEI Research Manager) served as research manager and was a major contributor to the development of the Roadmap
document. Matt Regan (BAC Senior Vice President) and Michael Cunningham (BAC Senior Vice President) contributed significantly in
the development of the recommendations related to housing and transportation. Sean Randolph (BACEI Senior Director) was a core
contributor to the content on infrastructure investment. Linda Galliher (BAC Vice President) and Brianne Riley (BAC Policy Associate)
contributed to the recommendations on workforce development. BACEI interns, Carolyn Garrett and Duke Butterfield III, provided
valuable research assistance at different phases of the project. Rufus Jeffris (BAC Vice President/Communications Director) provided
critical writing and editorial input. Micah Weinberg (BACEI President) provided valuable feedback on the development of this document.
The Institute would like to thank the many reviewers in the community who offered helpful feedback on the development of the
economic strategy.
about the institute
Since 1990, the Bay Area Council Economic Institute has been the leading think tank focused on the economic and policy issues facing
the San Francisco Bay Area, one of the most dynamic regions in the United States and the world’s leading center for technology and
innovation. A valued forum for stakeholder engagement and a respected source of information and fact-based analysis, the Institute
is a trusted partner and adviser to both business leaders and government officials. Through its economic and policy research and its
many partnerships, the Institute addresses major factors impacting the competitiveness, economic development and quality of life
of the region and the state, including infrastructure, globalization, science and technology, and health policy. It is guided by a Board
of Trustees drawn from influential leaders in the corporate, academic, non-profit, and government sectors. The Institute is housed
at and supported by the Bay Area Council, a public policy organization that includes hundreds of the region’s largest employers and
is committed to keeping the Bay Area the world’s most competitive economy and best place to live. The Institute also supports and
manages the Bay Area Science and Innovation Consortium (BASIC), a partnership of Northern California’s leading scientific research
laboratories and thinkers.

1
table of contents
Visual Summary 2
Executive Summary 4
The Need for a New Approach
to Regional Economic Strategy 8
The Quickening Pace of Change and Increasing Volatility 9
The Current Context of Regional Efforts Underway 16
New Approach: Building Regional Economic Resilience 16
Best Practices: Regional Strategies
and Innovative Approaches 20
Examples of Successful Regional Economic Strategies 21
Innovative Approaches from Bay Area Communities 22
Takeaways from Best Practices 24
Positioning the Bay Area for Success 25
1. Secure the Future through Critical
Regional Infrastructure Investment 27
2. Chang the Math for Housing
Development in the Bay Area 30
3. Form the Bay Area Regional
Economic Development Partnership 36
4. Create An Adaptive Regional System for
Workforce Development:
Producing World-Class Skills
and Expanding Opportunity 41
5. Driving Greater Efficiency in the
Bay Area’s Transportation System 44
Appendix A: Meetings with Local Business
And Economic Development Groups 50
Appendix B: Strategic Engagement Process Meetings 51
Endnotes 52

a regional
Recognizes the real interdependencies
that exist across the Bay Area economy.
interdependencies
Recognizes the success of
the Bay Area economy
is increasingly reliant on
the seamless movement of
people and goods around
and through the region.
bay area economy
The Bay Area consists of 101 cities, but it is one economy with
more than 7 million people living, working and recreating across
the region. No city can perceive itself as an island. It’s time for
policy makers and business leaders to think and act with a
regional perspective in order to maximize our many assets and
keep the economy growing.
jim wunderman
CEO, Bay Area Council
The Bay Area’s economic strength lies in the
diversity and adaptability of its innovative
companies and its ability to attract the best and
the brightest from around the world. But the
region has a lot to lose. Other vibrant hubs of
innovation and opportunity are growing around
the world as they develop and invest in
infrastructure, education and quality of life.
dr. laura tyson
Professor of Business Administration
and Economics, UC Berkeley
This period of remarkable growth is the time to be thinking strategically about
how best to position the region going forward, and how best to prepare for the
next round of economic cycles.
john williams
President & CEO, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco
high housing costs in
the bay area have
reached a crisis level,
and regional policies
need to address this
issue by incenting
sustainable growth and
combating resistance to
development.
lack of investment in
the region’s aging and
overcrowded
transportation systems
is undermining the bay
area’s future
prosperity. in addition,
a lack of strong
linkages across transit
agencies inhibits a
systemic approach to
addressing the region’s
growing and changing
transportation needs.
the bay area requires
regional collaborative
action on workforce
development in order to
improve programming
and funding efficiencies
and better span the
growing skills gap.

perspective
Recognizes individual communities
benefit from the economic activity of the
region as a whole and therefore need to
play a role in meeting the region’s needs,
such as building diverse housing.
individual communities
Recognizes the labor force
is distributed across the
region, typically living and
working in different cities.
labor force
The Bay Area, with its many diverse
communities, has a reputation for the
pioneering spirit of innovation that is
at the heart of the American dream.
We must work together to invest in
affordable housing, a learning and
engaged workforce, and public
transportation to support thriving
communities.
bernard tyson
CEO, Kaiser Permanente
the region’s economic
development requires
focus and a regional
perspective.
the bay area needs to
facilitate best-in-class
infrastructure
investment to support
the growth of the
regional economy.

4
The Bay Area is a global economic powerhouse. It is the model
high-tech innovation hub, spawning generations of the world’s
most iconic brands—companies like Intel, Apple, Tesla and
Google—and innovative products and technologies. Companies
and creative people flock to the region to develop new
technology, lead breakthroughs in science, start companies,
and drive the continued evolution of the region’s open and
highly productive innovation ecosystem. The Bay Area hosts
high concentrations of federal and private research labs
driving radical breakthroughs in science and engineering;
attracts nearly half of all venture capital invested in the
United States; and has developed a diverse network of highly
specialized business services that support the innovation
economy. Its universities are among the best in the world. The
region’s population of early adopters helps drive technological
advance and new applications of technology that help improve
communities and lives. Many of the region’s cities are on
the cutting edge of leveraging new technology platforms
for improving the delivery of public services. The Bay Area’s
stunning natural beauty and mild climate only add to its appeal.
e x e c u t i v e s u m m a r y

5
As uncertainty and volatility increase, how do we grow our
economic, environmental and social resilience? Resilience
is an ability to recover from or adjust easily to misfortune or
change. New opportunities come with change, and they are best
leveraged when a community is willing to proactively shape the
future. The remaining option is a reactive mode, responding to
immediate crises instead of preparing strategically for the future
which is inherently different than today.
The purpose of the Regional Economic Strategy Roadmap is
to offer concrete actions for growing regional prosperity and
a flexible framework for developing actions going forward.
Its proposals are evergreen agents of economic resilience,
strategies wise in both expansion and downturn, necessary to
accelerate the former and dampen the latter. It is a recipe for a
robust and enduring regional economy.
And yet, for all its strengths, the Bay Area lacks any cohesive
and comprehensive regional economic strategy for sustaining
economic growth, weathering business cycles and supporting
shared prosperity across the region. Given the regional nature
of the economy, its labor pool, housing sheds, job centers
and commute flows, viable solutions must reflect a regional
perspective.
the bay area has not prepared for the normal pace of
growth over the last several decades. This becomes
painfully obvious during periods of economic expansion. If not
meaningfully addressed, persistent issues around housing,
transportation, and the workforce threaten the region’s
current growth cycle and its ability to rebound into the next
growth cycle.
technological advance is driving change across the economy,
disrupting markets and entire industries, promising new
opportunities, and adding pressure to the growing skills gap.
the robust economic growth in the Bay Area is one of the
strongest in the US coming out of the last recession. Since
2010, Bay Area employment has grown at nearly double the
rate of other US metropolitan areas.
the housing market has reached a crisis point. Our
region’s workforce is commuting longer times, from farther
distances, and paying a greater share of household income
for housing, reducing quality of life and forcing businesses
and families to relocate.
transportation networks are stressed. As people are
priced out of the region’s core, congestion and commute times
have increased—over 20% of commutes exceed 45 minutes.
BART ridership has risen 55% since 1998, and the system is at
capacity during peak commute times.
gains in income following the recession have been
uneven. Income disparities are exacerbated by a growing
skills gap. In California, middle-skill jobs account for 50% of
California’s labor market, but only 40% of the state’s workers
are qualified.

6
a roadmap to regional economic resilience
Overwhelmingly, the business and other leaders who were
engaged over a 12-month process demonstrated a regional
perspective in identifying the top opportunities for growing
broad-based prosperity in the region and the requirements
for success. There was a fundamental assumption that the Bay
Area is a regional economy that requires coordinated regional
solutions. Five major areas of recommendations are presented
below:
1. the bay area needs to facilitate best-in-class
infrastructure investment to support the growth of the
regional economy. Page 27
Restructure the financing of public infrastructure through the
creation of an empowered regional planning, finance, and
management entity.
Reform existing public institutions. New mechanisms and
processes are needed to expedite critical infrastructure
development.
Give the empowered regional entity authority to gain
financial support. Funding tools such as expanded tolling
on bridges, highway corridors, and express lanes can be
leveraged and allocated to key projects.
Drive project delivery. Improve efficiency in the planning
and permitting of infrastructure development. Facilitating
public-private partnerships can be helpful, as private
sector capital and management expertise can deliver
superior value for the public.
Develop new sources of traditional and alternative finance to
augment public resources.
Bring a regional funding mechanism to the voters. There
is opportunity for a realignment of tax structures related
to transportation in the region. A shared regional sales
tax, gas tax, or vehicle license fee can supplement existing
county transportation sales tax measures.
Prioritize spending on key regional infrastructure.
Projects such as the connection of BART to San Jose,
Highway 101 and Caltrain corridor improvements, a new
transbay BART tube, and expanded water transit services
should have access to shared regional funds.
2. high housing costs in the bay area have reached a crisis
level, and regional policies need to address this issue by
incenting sustainable growth and combating resistance
to development. Page 30
Build sufficient housing stock to meet the demands of a
growing regional population and help to fill historic deficits.
The Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
process needs real teeth. Connecting state and regional
government transportation funding allocations to housing
production goals can provide an incentive for cities to
meet their RHNA obligations. Actual housing production
needs to be consistent with local and regional plans within
a reasonable timeframe. Otherwise there need to be real
consequences, such as loss of local approval authority,
state mandated “by right” approvals of housing projects
(which removes some discretionary approvals from project
review processes), the creation of more “by right” zoning
districts, or the creation of a regional hearing body to
approve housing developments.
The Bay Area must expand the stock of secondary units
or “in-law” units. Legislation should be drafted to expand
and simplify approval of “in-law” or Accessory Dwelling
Units (ADUs) so more density can be accommodated
throughout residential areas in the region, not just on large
development sites. A regional fund should be created to
help homeowners finance ADU projects.
The fiscalization of municipal land use decisions needs to
change. Current tax policy encourages local governments
to zone for commercial over residential land uses and must
be modified to expand sites for housing.
Reduce the cost of new home construction across the
Bay Area.
Encourage streamlined approvals for lower-cost
construction types and new building technologies.
Streamlining building permitting and codes to allow
for various density levels and for new innovations in
construction, such as Factory Built Housing, can lower
building costs.
Cap impact fees region-wide. The impact fees assessed
by cities on new housing are increasingly preventing
construction, and new options should be explored for
funding community infrastructure so that the costs of
promoting livable communities and affordable housing are
shared among both existing and new residents.
Reform the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). CEQA litigation has become a significant barrier
to infill development. A CEQA exemption for new home
construction meeting transit-oriented development goals
should be created to limit costly lawsuits.

7
3. the region’s economic development requires focus and
a regional perspective. Page 36
Create the Bay Area Regional Economic Development
Partnership, a regional body that would sustain the Bay
Area’s global economic competitiveness.
Create a platform for public-private collaborative action
across jurisdictions on regional economic strategy.
Creating consistent business permitting guidelines across
jurisdictions and aggregating zoning, tax incentive, and
local development plans can assist businesses looking to
expand their operations in the Bay Area.
Facilitate the growth of Bay Area companies within the
region and support the entrance of new companies. A
regional partnership could provide a unified voice for
communicating the diversity of development opportunities
in the region, internally and externally.
Provide local governments with concrete planning and
other support to unlock development potential. Due to
limited resources, local governments often do not have
the capacity to launch major projects that could be of
significant benefit locally and regionally. For example,
a regional partnership could offer planning and other
resources to local development projects around transit
hubs and former military bases.
4. the bay area requires regional collaborative action on
workforce development in order to improve programming
and funding efficiencies and better span the growing
skills gap. Page 41
Establish the Bay Area Collaboration on Workforce
Development, a regional public-private collaborative to
better connect employers’ skills needs and workforce
training programs and improve resource alignment.
Create a system for ongoing communication between the
region’s employers and educator/training community. A
collaboration of employers, educators, trainers, and other
stakeholders can enable highly adaptive and cost-effective
planning for competency development programs driven by
the changing needs of employers.
Provide public education and inform public policy. Inform
the public and key stakeholders about current economic
trends and promising certificates, credentials, and career
pathways.
5. lack of investment in the region’s aging and
overcrowded transportation systems is undermining
the bay area’s future prosperity. in addition, a lack
of strong linkages across transit agencies inhibits a
systemic approach to addressing the region’s growing
and changing transportation needs. Page 44
Improve the efficiency of transportation systems in order to
support the current economic growth cycle and prepare for
the next.
Align the region’s 26 transit agencies. A single Short
Range Transit Plan for all regional transit services in the
Bay Area would enhance regional planning for the transit
system, which otherwise could only be accomplished
through transit agency consolidation. Given the nature of
growth, a regional super agency will be necessary in the
long term.
Utilize funds to implement Corridor Operation and
Investment Plans. Collaborative planning will ensure
that corridor operational and investment strategies are
consistent and mutually supportive across jurisdictions in
key transportation corridors.
Create an Innovation Incentive Program. Funds should be
set aside for grants to Bay Area transportation agencies,
cities and counties that propose the most promising
applications of technology, incentives, entrepreneurism,
and market mechanisms to improve transportation
performance.

8
The Regional Economic Strategy Roadmap aims to lay the
foundation for building the vital feedback loops, resilience, and
agility the region requires for securing broad-based prosperity in
our communities going forward. The recommendations presented
in this Roadmap reflect thoughtful discussions among business
and other leaders in the region over the course of a 12-month
engagement process. These individuals brought their unique
perspectives from their industries and areas of expertise. They
also brought their added perspectives as neighbors, colleagues,
and parents with a vested interest in supporting the growth of
shared opportunity in the Bay Area.
The Bay Area’s diverse businesses drive the regional economy
and global innovation. They also employ the vast majority of the
region’s workforce, support local universities and schools, and
engage in philanthropic efforts in the community and globally.
Many of the region’s employers are deeply integrated into the
global economy, giving them valuable insight into the quick pace
of change taking place in global markets. For example, they see
how infrastructure needs (such as transportation systems) are
not being met in the Bay Area and how they are in other places in
the world.
Bringing together the perspectives from the Bay Area’s business
community and the public sector is critical for maintaining the
Bay Area’s economic vitality. Employers are on the front end of
recognizing changing skills needs in the workforce. Given the
strong economy, Bay Area employers are currently experiencing
a recruitment crisis that is deeply exacerbated by the region’s
housing crisis. As employers expand in the region, transportation
systems have not kept pace with growing volumes of commute
and other traffic or widening geographic demand.
The Bay Area benefits from enviable economic strengths with
its world-class companies, talent, and quality of life. And
yet, the Achilles’ heel to the region’s success is the mix of
institutional barriers that inhibit the region from making the
investments it needs to support the current growth cycle and
future prosperity. In the context of a quickly changing global
economy, there is much to be done to address the growing
crises in housing, transportation, workforce, and infrastructure.
Given the regional nature of these issues, viable solutions must
reflect a regional perspective.
the need for a new approach
to regional economic strategy
The Bay Area consists
of 101 cities, but it is
one economy with
more than 7 million
people living, working
and recreating across
the region. No city
can perceive itself as
an island. It’s time
for policymakers and
business leaders to
think and act with a
regional perspective in
order to maximize our
many assets and keep
the economy growing.
– Jim Wunderman
CEO, Bay Area Council

9
The Bay Area must also prepare for the quickening pace of
change. Advances in technology are upending industries,
spawning entirely new industries, and reshaping our work and
home lives. Demographic changes are driving new needs and
attitudinal shifts. Our integration with the global economy is
also picking up speed. Growth driven by emerging economies is
increasing demand for all natural resources, and climate change
is threatening communities around the world and around the
Bay Area.
As uncertainty and volatility increase, how do we grow our
economic, environmental, and social resilience? Resilience is an
ability to recover from or adjust easily to misfortune or change.
Accepting that change is normal is the first step to being able to
recognize the new opportunities that are emerging and to adapt
to a new context. The alternative is to remain in a reactive mode,
which resigns the region to a highly vulnerable position.
This section briefly describes some of the current strengths,
growing pressures, and drivers of change in the Bay Area
economy. It lays out the context of other regional efforts
underway in the Bay Area and the complementary value this
Roadmap brings. Finally, this section presents a framework for
approaching a regional economic strategy that aims to develop
agility and adaptability in the economy.
the quickening pace of change and
increasing volatility
Technological advance is driving change across the economy,
disrupting markets and entire industries, promising new
opportunities, and adding to the growing skills gap. The Bay
Area economy has experienced one of the fastest growth rates
in the US coming out of the last recession. Since 2010, Bay
Area employment has grown at 3.2% annually, double the rate
of peer US metropolitan areas.1
Over the last several decades,
the Bay Area has not made the necessary investments to
support normal population and job growth, and during periods
of economic expansion, this becomes painfully clear around
housing, transportation, and workforce needs. These issues, if
not addressed in a meaningful way, threaten the region’s current
growth cycle and its ability to rebound into the next growth cycle.
technological advances are disrupting entire
industries and also presenting exciting new
opportunities for improving lives and creating new
economic opportunities.
Much of this transformational technology is being driven by
companies and individuals located in the Bay Area. These
developments spur new businesses and jobs, as well as entirely
new business models.
We are currently witnessing the reinvention of all industries
through smart mobility, cloud computing, social networking,
big data analytics, and accelerated technology adoption.
This process will continue with billions of sensors covering
our landscapes, buildings, homes, clothes, and even bodies.
Communication will take place between infrastructure and cars,
between machines and people, and between machines.
A massive revolution is also taking place in how we make
things. 3D printing is now used by artisanal makers spawning
new businesses as well as by large-scale manufacturers for the
production of sophisticated components. Robotics and human
augmentation are changing the factory floor as well as the
operating rooms of hospitals. Breakthroughs in nanomaterials
are resulting in tiny batteries for tiny devices and paper-thin
armor and solar cells. Biology is now programmable: bacteria
and yeast are being altered to produce products they would not
normally make, such as fuels or drugs.
New platforms are emerging in the region that enable new
business and work models. Sharing platforms like Airbnb and
ZimRide allow individuals to generate new revenue streams
from their own assets, such as an extra room or car. Maker
spaces like TechShop and mobile payment systems like Square
offer new options for artisanal and freelance activity. Local city
governments are creating new systems for providing public
services such as waste removal and paramedic services more
efficiently,2
thus also spurring new business activity. Cities such
as Palo Alto and San Francisco have hired Chief Innovation
Officers who look for ways of opening up municipal data to
business in order to improve the delivery of public services.
The expanding application of technology has the potential for
increasing productivity and creating new economic opportunities.
On the other hand, the spread and development of technology
also expands the skills gap and the potential for individuals
to be left behind. There is a fundamental need to prioritize
the provision of relevant training opportunities that are also
accessible in terms of cost and scheduling.

10
many things are going well in the bay area
Businesses have taken advantage of technological advances
and a robust investment landscape to grow their output and
employment.
The Bay Area has witnessed some of the strongest job growth
in the nation following the Great Recession. Employment
expanded in the San Jose Metro Area by 23.7% from its lowest
point in July 2009 and in the San Francisco Metro by 17.6% from
its low in August 2010.3
Together, these two metro areas make
the Bay Area one of the five fastest growing economic regions in
the country4
—a product of the region’s diverse technology-driven
economy and strong global ties.
The region’s employment today is at an all-time high. While
recent job creation has been strong, the Bay Area economy is
witnessing growing volatility in its boom and bust cycles, as
evidenced by recent recessions. During the Great Recession, the
US lost 8.8 million jobs from its pre-recession peak, a 6.5% drop.
Although the Bay Area was slower to slip into the downturn,
from peak-to-trough (June 2008 to January 2010), the Bay Area
lost over 300,000 jobs, or nearly 9.0% of employment. The
bursting of the dot-com bubble in the early 2000s produced
similarly steep job losses in the Bay Area, and only recently has
employment surpassed the peak of 2001.
The Bay Area’s economic growth is outpacing other parts of the
state and nation. The San Jose Metro gross domestic product
increased 6.7% from 2013 to 2014, reaching $214 billion. The
San Francisco/Oakland Metro generated economic activity of
$412 billion in 2014, increasing 5.2% over 2013. Both metro areas
outpaced the Los Angeles area, and the 2.3% increase average
for all US metros.5

3,579,900
3,156,200
3,715,100
bay area nonfarm employment
Reported as of June of each year
Note: Shading represents recessionary periods as defined by the National Bureau of Economic Research
Data Source: California Employment Development Department, CES
Analysis: Bay Area Council Economic Institute
1990
0.0
2.5
4.0
3.0
2000 2005 2015
3.5
1995 2010
0.5
2.0
1.0
1.5
totalmonthlyemploymentinmillions
metro economic growth
total GDP 2014 percent change
(billions) 2013-2014
San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward $412 5.2%
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara $214 6.7%
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim $866 2.3%
U.S. Metro Areas 2.3%
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis
This period of
remarkable growth is
the time to be thinking
strategically about how
best to position the
region going forward,
and how best to prepare
for the next round of
economic cycles.
– John Williams
President & CEO
Federal Reserve Bank
of San Francisco

11
The Bay Area economy benefits from diversity and a high
concentration of technology industries. The region is home to
headquarters of global companies in retail, finance, healthcare,
energy, and many technology and social media giants.
Technology is a major driver of the global economy and local
job growth. For every job at a technology company, 4.3 new jobs
are created across the economy.6
Highly concentrated, the tech
sector accounts for 30% of San Jose Metro employment and 14%
of San Francisco Metro Area jobs.7
Nationally, tech accounts for
less than 9% of all employment. Unlike most technology hubs,
the Bay Area is not dominated by a single large tech company
or sector. In addition to being highly concentrated, the Bay
Area’s technology industry is highly diverse, spanning hardware,
software, biotech, clean tech, communications, and social media.
This diversity helps drive innovation as different technologies
come together to create entirely new products, and it creates
resilience despite major shifts in specific technology areas.
Venture capital investment is robust. Although venture capital
investment remained moderate between 2002 and 2013, total
dollars invested in 2014 nearly doubled from the prior year,
returning investment levels to the lofty heights last seen in 1999.
In 2014, venture capital investment in the Bay Area reached
$24.7 billion on the heels of large funding rounds for Uber,
Lyft, Airbnb, and Dropbox. By the first half of 2015, investment
reached $15.2 billion. The Bay Area currently accounts for
nearly 50% of total US venture investment. This represents a
growing concentration of venture capital activity in the region,
rising steadily since the 1990s. Ensuring that this rich resource
of venture capital remains in the region requires a committed
investment in the region’s innovation ecosystem and foundations
for sustainable economic growth, such as transportation,
housing and workforce development.
venture capital investment
Note: "Bay Area" Includes northwestern California
Data Source: PricewaterhouseCoopers/National Venture Capital Association MoneyTreeTM Report
0
50
45
40
35
95 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14
bay area percentage of california percentage of u.s.
billionsofdollarsinvested(inflationadjusted)
96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 1H
2015
30
25
20
15
10
5
0%
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
percentoftotalinvestment

12
at the same time, significant pressures are rising
that endanger the region’s current growth and
competitiveness going forward
As jobs and population increase and the housing crisis worsens,
traffic congestion is growing, and the severity of the region’s
infrastructure crisis is becoming evident.
Bay Area housing costs and rent prices are at an all-time high.
This is in part the result of building cycles that have experienced
lower peaks and deeper valleys over the last decades. Nearly half
of Bay Area renters are considered burdened by housing costs:
the percentage of Bay Area renters spending more than 30% of
their income on rent increased from 28% to 49% from 2000 to
2013.8
Average rental prices across the nine counties exceeded
$2,000 per month in 2014. While housing permits have witnessed
a recent uptick, the mid-2000s marked the start of two trends
in the Bay Area—a shift from majority single-family to multi-
family permits and a slowing down of annual housing permits.
These shifts have been most acutely felt in San Francisco, where
average rents have increased by nearly 50% since 2010. This
steep increase reflects a supply and demand mismatch, as the
Bay Area region permitted just 193 housing units per 1,000 new
residents from 2012 to 2013; the national average over this
period was 384 new units per 1,000 new residents.9
average asking rent for apartments in properties with 50+ units
Bay Area and San Francisco
Data Source: Real Facts
0
$3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
bay area (9 counties) san francisco
averageaskingrent
1,500
1,000
500
The Bay Area,
with its many diverse
communities,
has a reputation for
the pioneering spirit
of innovation that is
at the heart of the
American dream.
We must work
together to invest in
affordable housing, a
learning and engaged
workforce, and public
transportation to
support thriving
communities.
– Bernard Tyson
CEO, Kaiser Permanente

13
Housing supply constraints and the high prices they cause
have also forced many Bay Area residents to look for housing
outside of high-demand areas, where lower housing costs are
accompanied by longer commutes. This dynamic has strained
the Bay Area’s transportation systems—including its highways
and public transit operations—and led to greater congestion and
longer commute times. In 2012, over 20% of commuters spent
more than 45 minutes on the road to reach their workplaces.10
The BART system is also at capacity during peak commute times,
as its ridership has grown by 55% since 1998; however, only
10% of Bay Area commuters utilize public transit to reach their
workplaces.
While workers are making longer commutes, the total number
of cars and trucks on the road within the region has also moved
above pre-recession levels. Traffic within gateway corridors
to the nine-county region is adding to congestion, as 587,000
vehicles traveled between the Bay Area and neighboring counties
daily in 2013—the highest level in seven years and a 34%
increase since 1992.11
With more people on the move, traffic
congestion has increased and average speeds have fallen. From
2011 to 2013, average daily vehicle hours of delay on I-580 in the
East Bay grew by 26%, now making it one of the most congested
freeways in the region. In Alameda County, the crossroads of the
Bay Area, time spent delayed in traffic jumped from 12% to 22%
of total commute time between 2009 and 2013.12
bay area housing permits
Data Source: California Housing Foundation; Construction Industry Research Board
0
17,500
70,000
35,000
totalnumberofpermittedunits
52,500
67 00 03 06 09 1270 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97
single-family units multi-family units

14
median household income
Data Source: American Community Survey 2005-2013 1-year Estimates and the 2000 Decennial Census
0
$90,000
75,000
60,000
45,000
00 06 07 08 09 10 11 1201 13
bay area california
02 03 04 05
medianhouseholdincome
(adjustedforinflation)
30,000
15,000
Finally, the region is experiencing growing pressure on the
middle class. Over the last 15 years, GDP growth has not
translated into growth in middle incomes in the US. The Bay Area
is experiencing the same trend. Median household income in the
region dropped 9% from 2008 to 2011 and has stagnated since.
Statewide, median household incomes are 10% below 2008
levels.
Across the country, the percentage of households with incomes
under $35,000 has grown since the last recession. The widening
income gap is exacerbated by the lack of skills in the workforce
necessary for successful employment in the 21st century
economy. In California, middle-skill jobs—those requiring
education beyond high school but not a four-year degree—
account for 50% of California’s labor market, but only 40% of the
state’s workers are qualified.13
This growing income disparity is a problem around the world,
as some individuals acquire the skills to compete in the global
economy and many others do not. This has serious implications
for both the economy and society. According to Christine
Lagarde, managing director of the International Monetary Fund,
“Put simply, a severely skewed income distribution harms the
pace and sustainability of growth over the long term. It leads
to an economy of exclusion, and a wasteland of discarded
potential.”14
income distribution
Distribution of households by income ranges
Data Source: American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates
0%
100%
80%
60%
40%
bay area
20%
21%
28%27%
31%
39%44%
44%
54%
42%
45%
38%
39%
35%
18%
31%
24%23%17%
2007 2012
california
2007 2012
united states
2007 2012
under $35,000 $35,000-99,999 $100,000 and over

15
The development of the Bay Area’s workforce begins in the
region’s K–12 schools. The Bay Area has been successful
in preparing youth for success in comparison to statewide
averages, with a high school graduation rate of 84% and 46%
of graduates meeting UC/CSU entrance requirements in the
2013–2014 school year. Statewide, those averages are lower
Data Source: California Department of Education, Dataquest
50%
80%
60%
70%
Asian
share of high school graduates meeting UC/CSU entrance requirements
Bay Area, 2005/2006 & 2013/2014
percentageofhighschoolgraduates
withUC/CSUrequiredcourses
0%
White Multiple or
No Response
Filipino Bay Area Pacific
Islander
Hispanic American Indian/
Alaska Native
African
American
2005/2006 2013/2014
10%
40%
20%
30%
at 75% and 42%, respectively. However, these educational
outcomes are not widely shared across income levels or ethnicity.
Roughly 30% of Hispanic and African-American students meet
entrance requirements for UC and CSU systems, well below Bay
Area averages.15

16
the current context of regional
efforts underway
In 2012, the Bay Area Council Economic Institute produced The
Bay Area: A Regional Economic Assessment, a detailed economic
analysis of the region, at the request of the Bay Area’s regional
agencies—the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the
Association of Bay Area Governments, the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District, and the San Francisco Bay Conservation
and Development Commission—as well as the region’s leading
business and economic development organizations.
While the region enjoys many economic strengths, issues such as
housing cost and availability, congestion, regulatory efficiency,
and a lack of strategic focus on regional economic priorities
surfaced throughout the analysis. The Regional Economic
Assessment found that these issues point to the need for both
a more effective partnership between business and government
on economic issues and a stronger sense of shared purpose
surrounding the region’s growth and development.
Several ambitious regional efforts have been launched in recent
years that address a range of important issues facing the Bay
Area. The Bay Area Council Economic Institute has been engaged
in several of these efforts, including Plan Bay Area and the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development grant-funded
Regional Prosperity Plan. Many valuable sub-regional economic
development strategies have also been developed by diverse
stakeholder groups.
The regional planning and visioning efforts to date have focused
primarily on bettering the environment through reduced vehicle
miles traveled and smarter land use patterns, and they have
approached the Bay Area’s economy through the specific lens
of improving career pathways for low and moderate income
workers. While these are important and revealing documents,
the Bay Area still lacks a clear strategy for supporting economic
growth and expanding economic opportunity.
Set within the context of these regional efforts, the intention
of the Bay Area Council Economic Institute in the development
of the Regional Economic Strategy Roadmap is to bolster the
economic leg of the “Three E” stool: Environment, Equity, and
Economy. At the core of the process for developing the Regional
Economic Strategy Roadmap are discussions with business and
other leaders about identifying where they, as employers, see
opportunity to grow jobs and the economy in the region, and
what is required to achieve success. The strategy presented in
this document is the product of many in-depth conversations
with business leaders and others from the public and
independent sectors. The result of this 12-month effort is a series
of cohesive policy recommendations to strengthen the Bay Area’s
economy and identify tangible actions for regional agencies
as they approach the next iteration of Plan Bay Area and other
regional strategic efforts.
a new approach: building regional
economic resilience
A healthy economy is one in which things flow easily: people,
goods, money, and ideas. It is a dynamic system with diverse
elements and actors, each contributing in different ways to
growing the benefits to the community and evolving the output
and processes of all activities. Essentially, a healthy economy is
one that is undergoing a constant state of adaptation to an ever-
changing environment. It is evolutionary.
In a context that is always changing, constrained information
flows represent a major vulnerability. From any given vantage
point in a diverse system, information is limited.
In order to better weather volatility, anticipate change, and
prepare for it, the Bay Area needs to develop critical feedback
loops across different segments of the economy and community.
These diverse information flows provide early warning of change
as well as a platform for collaborative action among different
stakeholders.
As Nassim Nicholas Taleb eloquently explains in Antifragile
(2012), volatility can generate losses, but it can also generate
wins: “Some things benefit from shocks; they thrive and grow
when exposed to volatility, randomness, disorder, and stressors
and love adventure, risk, and uncertainty.” The result depends
on the adaptability of the system to improve from each shock
and disturbance. Developing robust feedback loops in a system
provides the information for directing adaptation, which builds
resilience and drives evolutionary development.
The Bay Area’s technology industry has been described as
“protean” in its ability to reinvent itself with each major
disruptive shift over the decades. In her comparison of the
region’s tech industry with that of Boston’s Route 128, AnnaLee
Saxenian, professor at UC Berkeley, described Silicon Valley as
a “protean place” (Regional Advantage, 1996), setting it apart
from other places that have been less able to adapt to major
disruptions. The diversity and dynamism of the Bay Area’s tech
industry has continually enabled it to change its form and adapt
to changing circumstances.
The term “protean” comes from the name of a sea god from
Greek mythology, Proteus, who could change his form to suit
his circumstances. Proteus could also tell the future. So, the
metaphor with the region is apt: the more adaptable and
dynamic a company, industry, or region can be, the better
prepared it will be for the future.
Faced with multiple pressures that jeopardize the region’s quality
of life and potential for expanding prosperity, the Bay Area must
harness its protean resources and take on a sustained adaptive
approach to supporting the region’s economic success.

17
building an adaptive and resilient system
The economy is a dynamic system consisting of diverse actors,
activities, and interactions. People, goods, money, and ideas
move around the system with the purpose of creating new
qualitative and economic value. Some economic systems allow
for more ease of movement and exchange than others, and some
are more adaptive to change and disruption.
Sudden shocks can impact the system:
A natural disaster such as an earthquake or flood can
mete out an abrupt blow to economic activity, damaging or
even destroying critical infrastructure and other public and
private property. In such situations, resources and economic
activity are redirected to rescue, safety, and construction
while much other economic activity goes on hold.
An economic downturn can hit abruptly, as was the case in
the last two downturns in the Bay Area. Within 24 months,
300,000 jobs were lost across the region’s economy: key
industries, their suppliers, population-serving sectors, and
the public sector.
Similarly, periods of rapid economic growth can reveal
longer-term investment shortfalls in infrastructure in a
region, as job and population growth can outpace the
capacity of public infrastructure and the construction of
new housing. The inability of the Bay Area to build enough
housing and infrastructure over the last few decades has
become clear in rising housing costs and roads and transit
systems packed beyond intended capacity.
Downturns tend to speed structural changes lingering under
the surface. In the case of an economic downturn, jobs are
lost unevenly across industries and occupations; some will
return and others will not.
Stresses to the system can build over time:
Population growth
Rising housing costs and lengthening commutes
Increasing traffic and travel times
Aging, inadequate road and public transit systems in need of
repair and expansion
Climate change resulting in rising sea levels, more frequent
droughts, and disruption of agriculture
Zero-sum thinking among stakeholders that inhibits
systemic approaches to addressing the needs of the region
as a whole
Multiple factors contribute to growing the resilience of a
regional economy:
Open communication and collaboration among diverse
stakeholder groups
An understanding of national and global trends that are
reshaping the competitive landscape
A positive view of opportunities on the horizon
The willingness to make strategic investments
The ability of decision-makers to act in a deliberative
manner and look beyond immediate self-interests
Decisions based on reliable evidence and metrics for
tracking progress
Openness to change and creative problem solving
Public prioritization of workforce development in order to
cultivate resilience at the level of the individual and family
An inclusive and protean view of place, community, and the
economy: “Change is constant, and we’re all in it together.”

18
building an adaptive and resilient regional economy
create a system of vital
feedback loops across
diverse stakeholder
groups.
stakeholder groups:
Business
Public Sector
K–12 Education
Higher Education
Occupational/Vocational Training
Environmental Management
Non-profit Sector
Research Centers/Labs
Labor Organizations
Others
engage, convene, and connect
on an ongoing basis:
Share observations of changing skills
needs and technology trends
Collaborate on training curricula
Develop a shared system for skill
certification in order to ease
movement of workers across
industries
leverage technology for added
automation to the feedback system.
create a shared platform
for tracking economic
trends and progress
toward goals.
maintain a shared information platform for summarizing and reporting out on
Findings from stakeholder feedback
Economic trends
Progress toward meeting stated goals
support movement and
qualitative growth
of the economy:
drive evolutionary
development.
economic mobility: Raising educational levels vastly reduces vulnerability and improves resilience
for the individual and the community. Invest in the development of world-class talent among
Bay Area youth and residents at all levels of education, including the retraining and upskilling of
adults.
information: Support exchange of insights on changing skills needs between employers and the
education/training community.
business: Encourage the creation and growth of business by streamlining permitting and other
required processes and regulatory frameworks.
goods movement: Invest in the seamless movement of goods to and from the region as well as
around the region.
people movement: Invest in the seamless movement of people on public transit systems and roads
in order to ease commutes and widen the scope of opportunity in the region.
natural systems: Support life as well as quality of life. When properly managed, natural systems
can also mitigate impacts of natural disasters and economic loss (e.g., bay wetlands).
regulation: Improve transparency and efficiency. Revise regulatory and legal frameworks
appropriately to reflect quickening technological advance.
manage vulnerability
within the community
with a systems view:
vulnerable elements
weaken the system
as a whole.
natural resources: They are limited, though some are renewable. When mismanaged, resource
constraints cause stress and conflict.
livelihoods: The capacity of individuals to provide for their families varies widely, tends to vary over
time, and has a broad vulnerability to shocks. In an increasingly volatile environment, vulnerable
populations (children, poor, elderly, mentally ill, and otherwise disabled) must be protected .
build anticipatory
systems and adapt in a
manner that benefits the
system as a whole.
disaster risk: Prepare for anticipated natural disasters and climate change adaptation.
early warning: Develop systems for tracking progress and identifying early warning signs.
leadership: With growing uncertainty, complexity, and volatility, leaders must make decisions based
on facts and build consensus to address issues that will increasingly span beyond traditional
jurisdictions.

19
Feedback loops can be put into place (and reinforced) to
heighten the capacity of a regional economy to better adapt to
changing circumstances and withstand the impact of sudden
shocks. An ongoing, iterative approach to economic strategy
allows for making informed adjustments along the way. This also
requires flexibility within institutions and collaboration among
stakeholders.
For individuals, businesses, and communities, resilience
develops as we grow, gain more knowledge, and develop better
thinking and self-management skills. Collaborative exchange has
been a driver of human evolution and, as Matt Ridley describes in
The Rational Optimist (2010), continues today to be a source of
growing prosperity. Maintaining a highly interactive system with
dense networks of information exchange creates the foundation
for this prosperity. Taking an evolutionary view of the economy
will help drive adaptability and the qualitative growth of the
region’s development.
The table on the preceding page outlines five key areas of action
for building an adaptive and resilient regional economy. The
action described in each area is intended to be ongoing and
iterative, with adjustments informed by changing circumstances.
overcoming legacy barriers to building
regional resilience
The Bay Area is both blessed and burdened by the diversity of
its distinctive towns, neighborhoods, and wider geographical
areas. Its urban centers, wine country, and suburban areas
offer different lifestyles and reflect a variety of economic
circumstances. Even with this diversity, there is a high level of
interdependency. For example, nearly half of Bay Area workers
cross at least one county line when going to and from work.
As job tenure continues to decline, commutes shift around the
region at a far faster rate than people change homes. In many
cases, wealthy suburbs are largely reliant on the high wages
earned in the urban cores. Many suburban-based companies
depend on young talent living in vibrant urban centers.
The regional character of the Bay Area economy is sometimes
lost on its residents. In a region made up of nine counties and
101 cities, perspectives are sometimes narrow, and political and
institutional balkanization is evident in what is otherwise a highly
interdependent regional economy.
Looking beyond the nine counties, the successful development of
the Bay Area economy impacts the success of the wider Northern
California megaregion as well as the state as a whole.

20
best practices: regional strategies
and innovative approaches
As the nation emerged from the Great Recession approximately
five years ago, cities and regions across the country explored
strategies for creating job opportunities and rebuilding their
economies. Many of these efforts are similar to the one
undertaken by the Bay Area Council Economic Institute, each
with the goal of creating an environment to facilitate sustainable
economic growth.
This section highlights examples of regional economic strategy
processes from across the United States as well as innovative
efforts underway in the Bay Area.
The Bay Area’s
economic strength
lies in the diversity
and adaptability of its
innovative companies
and its ability to
attract the best and
the brightest from
around the world. But
the region has a lot
to lose. Other vibrant
hubs of innovation and
opportunity are growing
around the world as
they develop and
invest in infrastructure,
education and quality
of life.
– Dr. Laura Tyson
Professor of Business
Administration and
Economics, UC Berkeley

21
examples of successful regional
economic strategies
Five examples from across the United States are highlighted
below and provided important insights in crafting the actions
for success that are detailed in the final section. It should be
noted that these planning efforts largely occurred at a time
when regional economies and the national economy were still
experiencing fallout from the recession. In contrast, the Bay
Area has produced very strong economic growth in recent years,
leading strategic efforts to concentrate on ways for the region to
grow smartly and with more resilience going forward.
los angeles county strategic plan for
economic development
December 2009
Research for the Los Angeles County Strategic Plan for Economic
Development began with a survey of more than 5,000 businesses
operating in Los Angeles County to determine the health and
concerns of industry. This survey led to a general outline that
was followed by a series of focus groups and a public input stage
during which 1,070 individual stakeholders with cross-sector
representation helped to produce an economic development
blueprint. This led to a plan with 12 objectives and 52 strategies
to achieve goals critical to ensuring a strong, diverse, and
sustainable economy. Five core aspirational goals were
identified: prepare an educated workforce; create a business-
friendly environment; enhance quality of life; implement smart
land use policies, and create 21st century infrastructure.
chicago’s plan for economic growth and jobs
March 2012
World Business Chicago—the area’s business advocacy
organization—chaired the plan with a steering committee
comprised of the area’s key constituencies, including planning
organizations, foundations, and labor unions. Working with
the Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program, five
market levers that drive economic growth were analyzed:
economic sectors and clusters, human capital, innovation and
entrepreneurship, physical and virtual infrastructure, and public
institutions. The plan produced 10 transformative strategies for
the future of Chicago and the region, and several initiatives have
already been announced: a merger of workforce development
programs; business licensing reform; an Office of New Americans
strategy for business assistance to immigrants; construction of
a new cargo facility at O’Hare to increase exports; and formation
of the Chicago Infrastructure Trust to identify and fund city
infrastructure projects in partnership with private funders.
Central Puget Sound Region Regional
Economic Strategy
July 2012
The Puget Sound Regional Council created the Prosperity
Partnership, a public-private partnership to create an economic
strategy for the four-county area. The strategy includes ten
targeted industry clusters in the Puget Sound region: Aerospace,
Business Services, Clean Tech, Information Technology, Life
Sciences & Global Health, Military, Philanthropies, Maritime,
Tourism & Visitors, and Transportation & Logistics. Actions
completed through the strategy secured the approval of an
$8.5 billion statewide transportation partnership package
with funding for capacity improvements, freight, and system
efficiency.
atlanta regional economic competiveness strategy
October 2012
The Atlanta regional area consists of 10 counties surrounding
the city of Atlanta. The region’s competitiveness strategy
emphasized four goal areas: workers, business, entrepreneurs,
and communities. Planning efforts focused on an inventory of
existing initiatives, an assessment of the region’s strengths and
weaknesses, and a review of economic clusters. The strategy
produced numerous metrics for measuring success, including
dropping the unemployment rate below the national average,
doubling the number of startups coming out of universities and
colleges, increasing the percentage of adults holding a college
degree, and raising the ACT composite score.
washington, DC five-year economic
development strategy
November 2012
The Five-Year Economic Development Strategy came out of a
partnership between city leaders and four local graduate schools
of business: Georgetown, George Washington, American, and
Howard. Seven sectors deemed vital to the area’s economy
were identified—Federal Government, Higher Education &
Healthcare, Hospitality, Professional Services, Real Estate
& Construction, Retail, and Technology. Student teams were
assembled to analyze each sector and create strategies, which
included establishing the most business-friendly economy in the
nation, creating the largest technology center on the east coast,
ending retail leakage, and becoming a top destination for foreign
investors.

22
Common themes surfaced across each of the regional and
city-led efforts referenced, including five pillars of economic
development:
Education & Workforce Development
Business Attraction & Retention
Entrepreneurship & Innovation
Infrastructure
Quality of Life
In its 2012 Regional Economic Assessment, the Bay Area Council
Economic Institute previously found quality of life and innovation
factors to be competitive strengths for the Bay Area. The same
study also found that “areas of weakness include high housing
costs, infrastructure, K–12 education, and customer service in
government interactions.” As the Bay Area economy grows, these
issues—as outlined previously in Section 1—remain hurdles
to the expansion of opportunity and the Bay Area’s continued
economic success.
innovative approaches from
bay area communities
Not only is the Bay Area home to some of the world’s most
innovative companies, it is also home to innovative leaders
in the public sector. As one of the initial steps in the Regional
Economic Strategy Roadmap process, the Bay Area Council
Economic Institute led meetings that highlighted local best
practices in economic development and identified local priorities
and concerns in six sub-regions: the North Bay, San Francisco,
the East Bay, Santa Clara County, San Mateo County and Solano
County. The following sections highlight the key themes from
these six sub-regional meetings. The local best practices
examples included in these sections highlight successful
initiatives that cross jurisdictional borders or involve innovative
cross-sector partnerships.
Enabling the Return of Manufacturing Jobs
Manufacturing plays an important role in the Bay Area economy,
as manufacturing-related jobs usually span a wide range of wage
and education levels and offer career advancement. The region’s
technological capabilities, which include its national laboratories
and universities, give the Bay Area an important advantage in the
creation of new products, and strategic partnerships have played
a role in advancing innovation.
San Jose’s Environmental Innovation Center provides services
for clean tech entrepreneurs and helps contribute to San Jose’s
vision of a green future. In working with Prospect Silicon Valley,
a non-profit technology commercialization catalyst supported
by the City of San Jose, big and small companies will be able
to demonstrate new technological innovations in a real world
setting, helping them bring their products to the market faster.
In the East Bay’s Tri-Valley area, the presence of two national
laboratories—Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and
Sandia National Laboratories—has generated significant economic
benefits as technology advances have resulted in numerous new
products being generated by companies throughout the region.
Livermore Valley Open Campus, a joint venture between LLNL and
Sandia, works to facilitate research cooperation between the labs
and industry. Additionally, Tri-Valley’s iGATE (a part of the California
Innovation Hub program) acts as a business incubator for the
labs, offering R&D space to start-ups and helping to license lab
technologies for commercial use.
local best practice:
EAST BAY WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS
Innovative programs are now being created across the
East Bay to make quality, middle-skill jobs accessible to a
broader population, such as:
Design It! Build It! Ship It! is a consortium of 10 East Bay
community colleges, five workforce boards, UC Berkeley,
CSU Eastbay, East Bay EDA, and other regional partners.
The program looks to strengthen and expand training
programs in core areas of advanced manufacturing,
transportation and logistics, and engineering; implement
strategies to help unemployed adults change careers in an
efficient manner; and expand access to technical training
programs for low-income adults facing educational
barriers.
The Oakland-Alameda County Opportunity Youth Initiative
has a goal to connect over 2,000 opportunity youth (young
people aged 16-24 years who are neither in school nor
employed) to training and employment services leading
to career employment in the growth sectors of the East
Bay economy, as well as those sectors expected to have
openings because of retirement.
Meeting Education and Workforce Development Needs
The advancement of high-tech industries throughout the Bay
Area has put pressure on labor costs and has created a need
for more workers with specific skills. While many academic
institutions around the region maintain workforce collaborations
with industry, more programs could be focused on creating
career pathways for those individuals qualified for middle-
wage positions. Education serves as an important first step in
facilitating this development.
In the North Bay, Sonoma County and the John Jordan Foundation
have created a Career Technical Education Fund to advance
industrial arts and science, technology, engineering, and math
(STEM) programs by providing to schools $50,000 annually over
five years.

23
In the East Bay, the Diablo Gateways to Innovation Consortium
will receive an $8 million grant from the California Department
of Education for programs designed to keep students in school
and move them toward three high-demand fields: advanced
manufacturing and engineering, information and communication
technology, and health sciences.
In Richmond, Chevron has decided to tackle education and
workforce issues simultaneously by placing a $15.5 million
investment into the city. The goal is to create jobs, grow small
businesses, expand job-training opportunities, and improve
schools over the next five years.
Retaining Existing Businesses and Attracting New Entrants
While talent is often cited as a main reason for businesses
locating within the Bay Area, the high cost of doing business is
usually mentioned when companies are asked about drawbacks.
This issue includes minimum wage requirements, workers’
compensation, and high utility costs that impact businesses
across the state. Locally, issues with zoning and permitting
new development can drive up costs and delay timelines. To
address local issues with business attraction, the cities of San
Jose, Fremont, and Santa Rosa, among others, have streamlined
permit applications and created more flexible land use policies as
they deal with a limited amount of land zoned for industrial uses.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) poses another
hurdle for businesses, as development opponents often use
it to block or slow projects through litigation. Bay Area cities
have utilized more comprehensive planning processes—called
Specific Plans—that can allow approval of development over
a large swath of land without identifying a specific project.
A programmatic Environmental Impact Review (EIR) is often
adopted along with the housing, commercial, and industrial
development zoned in the Specific Plan. Projects consistent
with the development outlined in the plan are able to “tier” off
of the programmatic EIR. Rather than completing a full project-
level EIR, some of the CEQA requirements are loosened, thus
reducing project processing time and cost. The North San Jose
Development Project, Redwood City’s Downtown Precise Plan,
and multiple areas of Oakland have utilized this approach.
To further facilitate development, the City of San Carlos
authorized and established a Strategic Property Acquisition
Reserve in October of 2010. The purpose of the reserve is to
allow the City to purchase parcels of land that can be used for
the development of projects that will aid the economic vitality of
the city.
Linking Transportation Investments to Development
of Housing and Jobs
Multiple projects throughout the Bay Area will give local
governments an opportunity to better develop jobs and housing
connected to transportation. In the North Bay, cities have been
trying to create denser housing near transportation as a way
to create more affordable options with limited local traffic
impacts. The Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) project will
provide residents with their first rapid rail service option, and an
opportunity for planners to deliver transit-oriented development.
In Solano County, local leaders are emphasizing the importance
of the I-80 corridor connecting Vacaville, Fairfield, and Vallejo.
I-80 is currently a heavy freight corridor. A coordinated strategy
to attract a variety of businesses to the corridor could enable the
county to provide work opportunities to a greater percentage of
its residents. The I-80 corridor plan also identifies the need for
future transportation to the Mare Island Naval Complex, which
has been designated by the Vallejo City Council for industrial
land use.
NORTHERN WATERFRONT ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE
The northern waterfront is a shoreline of about 50
miles spanning from Hercules to Oakley in Contra Costa
County. The primary objective of the Northern Waterfront
Economic Development Initiative is to promote economic
development along the county’s working waterfront by
targeting business clusters and protecting industrial land
(61 percent of the land is zoned for industrial uses).
The project will seek to cooperate with members from both
the public and private sectors who have an interest in the
waterfront’s economic future. By bringing these interests
together, they will be able to better coordinate with each
other and share information and ideas about the emerging
trends and issues affecting the waterfront. A specific focus
will be placed on transportation, land use, environmental
regulation, and workforce development issues that
influence the waterfront’s economic prospects.

24
In Santa Clara County, the BART Warm Springs extension offers
new connectivity options to Silicon Valley and is the first step in a
route to San Jose.
While these transportation projects can lead to new
development of both residential and commercial space, the
Bay Area’s growth potential remains constrained by housing
availability across all levels of affordability—particularly
workforce housing. This is the goal of Napa County’s Work-
Proximity Housing Trust Fund. The program seeks to assist low-
to moderate-income workers in Napa County who intend to buy
a home within 15 miles of where they work. The county provides
down payment assistance to qualified buyers through a loan for
up to 10% of the purchase price of a home, with the stipulation
that the county is repaid 10% of the future sales price when the
property is sold. Through this model, the fund will continue to
support itself over time while incentivizing Napa County workers
to reduce their commutes.
takeaways from best practices
The examples provided above describe best practices used in
regional collaborative efforts from other places as well as local
innovative efforts initiated by Bay Area communities. While there
is much we can learn from the experiences of other regions, there
is also a great deal that communities in the Bay Area can learn
from each other. The aim is to capture both dimensions in this
document.
The collaborative regional initiatives were undertaken with
the aim of strengthening the economy and improving quality
of life through a regional perspective and approach. They help
demonstrate that collaborative action among private and public
sector leaders can create pragmatic action with lasting, positive
outcomes.
The Bay Area is not just home to innovative companies and
technology: it is also home to innovative public leaders and
practitioners. A key component of the Bay Area Regional
Economic Strategy Roadmap process was the series of meetings
with local stakeholders that took place around the region. The
purpose of these meetings was to hear directly from local leaders
about the new ideas and best practices they were implementing
(often hand in hand with private sector partners) and to hear
about what possible actions at the regional level they would find
most fruitful.
This feedback from Bay Area communities also served as a point
of departure for the policy recommendations presented in the
following section. These recommendations not only build from
the local best practices, they will also support sub-regional
efforts already underway and pave the way for the region as a
whole to more formally incorporate coordination into its planning
going forward—especially as it relates to communication among
agencies, organizations, and levels of government that are
working to create a more prosperous economy across the region.
NORTH BAY LIFE SCIENCE ALLIANCE
The North Bay Life Science Alliance (NBLSA) was
established as a collaboration of public and private
entities spanning Marin, Sonoma, Napa, and Solano
Counties. The Alliance, which is comprised of schools,
government officials, the US Commerce Department, and
many others, works to spur growth in the life sciences
industry.
Life sciences companies create many opportunities and
the NBLSA works to maximize the achievement of those
opportunities to bring economic prosperity to the North
Bay. By promoting life sciences, the NBLSA believes it
will help to grow the economy because high-grossing
industries, specialized real estate, and strong salaries all
create more revenue for local and regional governments,
while also enabling job creation across a wide range of
positions.
GRAND BOULEVARD INITIATIVE
The Grand Boulevard Initiative is a program to turn El
Camino Real, the most important commercial road on the
Peninsula, into a boulevard of meaningful destinations
shaped by all the cities along its length. The project
consists of a group of 19 different cities, counties,
and local and regional agencies united to improve the
performance, safety, and aesthetics of El Camino Real,
successfully fulfilling its role as the Peninsula’s most
important arterial road.
The 19 stakeholders are working together to accomplish
this goal through the Complete Streets Project, funded
by a US Department of Transportation TIGER II Planning
Grant. Complete Streets seeks to facilitate the re-design
of the roadway to integrate sustainable development and
encourage pedestrians, transit, and investment in the El
Camino Real corridor.

25
The Bay Area is a global economic powerhouse driving global
innovation. The region’s diverse business community employs
the vast majority of the region’s workforce and supports
educational institutions and other philanthropy in the region. The
Bay Area’s business leaders value the region’s distinctive assets,
but they also feel the negative impacts of the region’s housing
crisis and strained transportation systems. The high cost of
housing is dampening recruitment efforts, and under-developed
transit systems have forced some employers to create their own
busing operations. Deeply integrated into the global economy,
the region’s business leaders also see how other places in the
world are catching up with the Bay Area and learning quickly
how to prepare for the future through investments in education,
infrastructure and quality of life.
In order to ensure the Bay Area’s economic vitality and resilience
despite increasing boom and bust cycles, public and private
sector leaders must come together around pragmatic solutions
to persistent issues and barriers to success. The centerpiece of
the Regional Economic Strategy Roadmap is the compilation of
recommendations from the Bay Area business community that is
presented in this section. Over the course of 12 months, the Bay
Area Council Economic Institute engaged with business and other
leaders in a series of 11 interactive meetings to identify the top
opportunities for growing broad-based prosperity in the region
and the requirements for success.
positioning the bay area for success
The Bay Area relies
primarily on local
sales taxes to fund
infrastructure but
has little funding at
a regional scale to
deal with regional
projects. The region
would benefit by
identifying additional
funding sources to
facilitate needed
infrastructure programs
at the regional level.
– Ian Parker
Managing Director, Public
Sector & Infrastructure
Banking, Investment
Banking Division,
Goldman Sachs

26
Overwhelmingly, the gathered leaders demonstrated a regional
perspective in addressing the challenges and opportunities
facing the Bay Area. There was a fundamental assumption that
the Bay Area is a regional economy that requires coordinated
regional solutions. Five major areas of recommendations are
presented below:
Secure the Future through Critical
Regional Infrastructure Investment
Change the Math for Housing
Development in the Bay Area
Form the Bay Area Regional
Economic Development Partnership
Create an Adaptive Regional
System for Workforce Development:
Producing World-Class Skills and
Expanding Opportunity
Drive Greater Efficiency in the
Bay Area’s Transportation System
Many of the following policy recommendations fit the framework
of Plan Bay Area and can help inform regional planning
agencies as they develop an updated plan by 2017. Other
recommendations are presented as key strategies that can be
pursued to support the Bay Area’s long-term economic resilience
and prosperity. Together, the five policy areas represent
the central themes that emerged throughout the in-depth
engagement with the region’s business leaders.
But first, some thoughts on regional governance.
While the Bay Area has no formal regional government with
broad powers delegated to it, regional governance exists in the
multiple regional agencies with policy-making power. Dating
back to 1970, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission
(MTC) has authority over regional transportation planning, and
the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) has land use
authority. Even with their regional missions, these organizations
often protect the influence of cities and counties in the
region through their deliberative processes. In MTC’s case, its
governing commission is largely composed of supervisors from
the Bay Area’s nine counties, while ABAG was created by local
governments and has an executive board composed entirely of
locally elected officials.
Finding the appropriate balance between maintaining the
influence of local governments while inserting a greater degree of
pragmatic regionalism into the Bay Area’s governance structure
can be a first step in tackling many of the regional policy issues
identified through this research and engagement process.
This approach, where local priorities give way to regional
thinking, has been successfully implemented by Portland and
Minneapolis-St. Paul.
Portland’s regional government, Metro, is responsible for land
use and transportation—much like the Bay Area’s existing
regional agencies—though with one major difference: Metro
is the only directly-elected regional government in the US.
Metro’s authority covers three counties and 25 municipalities,
and its seven-member board has representatives elected from
six districts and a council president elected region-wide. Unlike
other regions that have councils of governments made up of
representatives from each municipality, Metro’s council members
do not actively advocate for the interests of any one city or
county. Minneapolis-St. Paul has a comparable system with its
Metropolitan Council, which is the region’s metropolitan planning
organization, the operator of a regional transit system, and the
regional housing and redevelopment authority. The governor
appoints its 17-member policy-making board, with elected
officials playing a role only within advisory committees.
The models utilized in Portland and Minneapolis-St. Paul
provide examples of non-traditional regional governance
structures that have been sustained for decades. However, both
Portland and Minneapolis-St. Paul are relatively small regions in
comparison with the Bay Area, and their constituencies are fairly
homogenous. Even with their success, these models have not
been replicated elsewhere.
Looking across the country, regional governance takes many
shapes and forms, and is often a complicated balancing act
between the interests of local governments, state government,
and regional stakeholders. The Bay Area governance structure
is even more complex due to its fragmented system of 26
independent transit operators and individual planning
departments in over 100 cities across nine counties. While
MTC and ABAG do provide a measure of consolidation at the
regional scale, there is need and opportunity to develop a
stronger regional approach to addressing critical needs related
to infrastructure, housing, workforce training, and economic
development.
1
2
3
4
5

27
Secure the Future through Critical
Regional Infrastructure Investment
context and goals
Infrastructure has important implications for a community’s
vitality. The most recognizable involve the bridges, roads, and
transit systems that facilitate the movement of goods and
people. Public water systems and flood protection agencies
often go unseen, but provide safe and reliable drinking water
and keep communities safe. Other types of infrastructure include
public buildings such as schools, hospitals, and administrative
buildings, and the 21st century infrastructure comprised of the
wires and cables that deliver communications services and
electricity to homes and businesses. The quality and resilience
of this infrastructure is critical to the shared prosperity and
economic competitiveness of the region and the state.
A recent California Forward analysis has found that California
faces an infrastructure finance requirement of $853 billion
over the coming decade.16
Of this, $495 billion can be
financed through currently identifiable funds, leaving a
deficit conservatively estimated at $358 billion. This estimate
is consistent with earlier findings by the Bay Area Council
Economic Institute and the Berggruen Institute on Governance.17
The greater part of this deficit—nearly $300 billion—is in
transportation, which remains a critical need as the state’s
population expands and businesses continue to grow. The
balance of the deficit is in water and school facilities.
Addressing these challenges in the Bay Area is compounded
by three factors: a decline in state and federal investment
in transportation, a fragmented local governance system for
infrastructure, and the lack of a sufficiently empowered regional
authority that can manage and invest in infrastructure on a
comprehensive level.
Transportation infrastructure poses particular challenges in
the Bay Area, where issues of mobility and congestion are
significantly impacting the region’s productivity, quality of life,
and its competitiveness in attracting and retaining a diverse,
high-quality workforce. The challenges to our transportation
system are acute. While the region is continuing to attract
companies and talented people today, it is also losing people
and opportunities due to the confluence of high housing costs
with worsening mobility. This poses a choice for residents and
would-be residents: pay sky-high housing costs or commute long
distances through thickening traffic.
State and federal funding for transportation is closely linked to
gasoline taxes. California’s gas tax—the nation’s fourth highest
at 42.35 cents per gallon—has not been raised since 1994. At the
national level, the federal gas tax has not been raised since 1993,
and would need to be increased over 12 cents per gallon (from
18.4 cents to 30.7 cents) just to restore purchasing power to
1993 levels. In addition to inflation eroding the purchasing power
of these taxes, the gas tax is also becoming a less effective
mechanism for meeting the state’s transportation needs because
it will steadily generate less revenue as cars become more fuel
efficient and electric vehicles gain in popularity. The California
State Transportation Agency estimates that by 2030, as much as
half of the state revenue that could have been collected from the
gas tax will be lost to fuel efficiency.18
While the Metropolitan Transportation Commission does have
regional authority for transportation planning and disbursal
of bridge toll revenues, a growing proportion of the region’s
transportation funding stems from county-specific sales tax
measures. With many infrastructure decisions made on the
local level by county transportation agencies and local transit
operators, the region suffers from the absence of an integrated
regional strategy, the ability to execute on a regional level, and
creative alternatives for how infrastructure can be developed and
financed. Each is necessary, however, as the region’s population
and economy continue to grow—with vulnerable populations
feeling the greatest pressure—and as public funding from state
and federal government fails to keep up.
Challenges to the region’s water infrastructure are also rising
as the state grapples with a fourth year of drought. California’s
reservoirs began the 2014–2015 water year at just 36 percent of
their capacity,19
agricultural losses have exceeded $2 billion,20
and nearly 20,000 jobs have been lost throughout the state.21
California’s six major water projects average 76 years in age, and
each delivers less water today than in the past. Partly due to this
aging infrastructure, California’s water system loses up to 228
billion gallons annually through leaks alone, more than enough
to supply Los Angeles for an entire year.22
Compounding the
problem, local and state mechanisms for funding water projects
have not kept up with demand.
Revenues from local water bills provide approximately 84
percent of the state’s annual water investments. These funds are
supplemented by intermittent general obligation bond issuance
at the state level. For example, the passage of Proposition 1 in
2014 authorized $7.5 billion in state bonds, but equates to only
about 25 percent of one year’s spending in the water sector.
In the Bay Area, 10 major water agencies maintain and provide
the bulk of the region’s water infrastructure and supply. This
fragmented system with siloed funding has resulted in limited
regional coordination for how to best manage and pay for the
Bay Area’s water infrastructure going forward.
1

28
The policy recommendations outlined here target three
critical goals:
Create best-in-class infrastructure investment in the
region—across all infrastructure categories—
to support improved mobility, economic
competitiveness, and better security and quality
of life for Bay Area residents.
Develop new mechanisms to expedite and accelerate
investment in infrastructure critical to regional
mobility, including a second transbay tube; BART’s
extension to growing job and housing centers; Caltrain
corridor improvements and extension into downtown
San Francisco; and expansion of the regional ferry
system to serve more communities in the North, East,
and South Bay.
Complete regional, multi-agency projects that improve
water supply resilience to drought by creating new
water systems, upgrading and linking existing
systems, and addressing climate change.
strategies and actions
The decline of state and federal funding for transportation
requires a greater local and regional will to fund, finance,
and develop infrastructure and essential services. For water
infrastructure, more coordinated regional investment actions are
needed to act as a link across water agencies and jurisdictions.
To maximize the resources available to the region, ensure their
efficient use, and comprehensively manage the development of
regional infrastructure, the Bay Area requires the following:
Regional organizations with increased authority to
prioritize, invest in, and manage infrastructure;
New sources of both traditional and alternative finance
to augment public resources.
action 1: Separately, or by augmenting an existing
regional body, create a regional infrastructure
financing authority, and empower it to play a
stronger role in regional transportation finance
and planning.
The financing of public infrastructure should be restructured
through the creation of an empowered regional planning,
finance, and management entity with the abilities to prioritize
investments at the regional level, attract and leverage funding
from a range of sources, and allocate resources based on
integrated regional strategies. Those resources should be
accessible to participating regional partners, and should
be strategically deployed to support a portfolio of projects,
including Enhanced Infrastructure Finance Districts (EIFDs).
In this regard, the authority could effectively become a “bond
bank,” receiving seed funding and lending to public sector
entities looking for capital that may not be available at cost-
effective rates in traditional funding markets.
The tools available to the authority should include the ability
to go before voters to gain financial support, as well as other
methods of traditional public finance, which could include
expanding tolling of bridges, highway corridors, and express
lanes. The tools should also include authority for design/build
and authority to facilitate partnerships that engage private
sector capital and management expertise to support regional
infrastructure priorities, particularly where a project’s life-cycle
costs and benefits can be shown to deliver superior value for
the public. In this respect, the authority would be similar to the
California Infrastructure Bank or the National Infrastructure Bank
recently proposed in Washington, D.C., and to organizations such
as Partnerships British Columbia in Canada that have developed
successful track records of attracting and leveraging private
resources.
While not appropriate for every project, when properly
structured, alternative procurement methods such as public-
private partnerships (P3) have demonstrated their value around
the world as sources of project finance and management that
can supplement public funds and deliver significantly improved
operations and maintenance outcomes, particularly on projects
over $100 million. This occurs through risk transfer/sharing with
the private partner and performance contracts that preclude
change orders. This model ensures that the private sector partner
is accountable for maintenance over the life of the contract (in
contrast with public procurements where maintenance is often
lacking or deferred).

29
In the Bay Area, the leading P3 project currently underway
is the Presidio Parkway, linking the Golden Gate Bridge with
San Francisco through the Presidio. While work will continue
into 2016, the Parkway has been essentially delivered on time
and on budget; preliminary estimates show it will have saved
taxpayers $178 million and provided critical infrastructure sooner
than would have been possible through a traditional public
procurement.23
This contrasts dramatically with other recent,
high profile public procurements in the region.
The success of this project and others privately operated
and maintained, such as the recently completed Oakland
Airport Connector, suggests that a more empowered regional
infrastructure body should have the capacity to systematically
evaluate the merits of public funding versus private finance in the
development of future projects and should serve as a resource
in this regard for local jurisdictions in their planning. This could
be done by MTC itself or by a special-purpose infrastructure
commission with public-private staffing that is linked to MTC and
the Association of Bay Area Governments.
action 2: Provide the regional infrastructure
financing authority with enhanced power to
acquire funding.
As gas tax revenues continue their slow decline, public
agencies around the state have looked to other avenues to fill
transportation funding gaps. The Bay Area has been particularly
successful in creating new revenue streams, as the region’s major
source of shared transportation infrastructure revenue comes
from Regional Measure 2, passed in 2004 to increase bridge tolls
by $1.00. Between 2004 and 2014, the Bay Area Toll Authority
has collected annual toll revenue in a range between $112 million
and $126 million.24
At the county level, sales tax measures have
been key to maintaining and expanding transportation systems.
For example, Alameda County passed an $8 billion, 30-year
transportation expenditure plan to fund countywide projects
through an increased and extended sales tax in 2014. Funding
available to the counties through sales tax measures is far larger
than that brought in through regional bridge tolls.
Given that many of the Bay Area’s key transportation projects
in coming decades will cover multiple counties—such as the
extension of BART to San Jose, Caltrain corridor improvements,
and a new transbay BART tube—a larger level of funding should
be available at the regional level that can help to prioritize
projects and move them over funding hurdles. A regional gas tax
or a large-scale funding mechanism measure, similar to Measure
R in Los Angeles, should be put to the voters. It should identify
the uses to which the funding would be allocated—including
multiple infrastructure and housing categories based on input
from regional leaders—and be tied to an implementation design
that calls for life-cycle performance, productivity, environmental
and user satisfaction, and quality of life considerations.
The success of such a measure will depend on a highly
transparent process and require an educational effort with the
public to increase awareness of infrastructure needs and of
how infrastructure is financed and delivered. Funding, however,
should flow from MTC only to local governments that implement
best practices in project delivery. This would include analyses
of the life-cycle costs and construction timelines of multiple
alternative financing and project delivery mechanisms, thereby
ensuring the most efficient use of public resources.
Another potential source of funding could stem from a regional
use fee on vehicle miles traveled. In 2014, Governor Brown
signed a law that set up a commission to study a road usage
charge and establish a pilot program by January 1, 2017. Other
states have also begun to test usage charges. In 2015, Oregon
debuted its pilot program, in which 5,000 volunteers pay 1.5
cents per mile driven and are refunded each month what they
paid under the state’s 30-cent gasoline tax. Given its confluence
of transportation funding needs and the fact that it is home to
many companies producing the technologies required to track
miles traveled, the Bay Area is well positioned to begin piloting
this new user fee model in California.
action 3: Coordinate the design, financing,
and building of large-scale water recycling,
desalination, and storage infrastructure through
a regional entity.
Over the past decade, the Bay Area’s water agencies have made
strategic investments that have improved regional water supply
resilience to drought and earthquakes. Notable projects include
the SFPUC Water System Improvement Program, the Santa Clara
Valley Water District-City of San Jose Silicon Valley Advanced
Water Purification Center, the Los Vaqueros Reservoir expansion,
the Freeport Regional Water Facility, regional reliability interties,
and others. However, addressing large-scale challenges such
as climate change and population growth will require improved
regional collaboration. The creation of new water supplies
through recycling and desalination, for example, will require
new purification, conveyance, and storage infrastructure on
a scale most effectively met through a regional approach.
Region-wide maintenance initiatives that reduce water losses
in the distribution and storage system could also be addressed
through this model. The Bay Area’s local water agencies should
utilize regional coordination—through a Joint Powers Authority
with an ability to capture private financing or an Enhanced
Infrastructure Financing District to leverage existing revenue
streams—to design, finance, and build new capital-intensive
regional water assets.

BACEI RES Report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (11)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (13)

Similar to BACEI RES Report

Similar to BACEI RES Report (20)

More from Tracey Grose

More from Tracey Grose (7)

BACEI RES Report